There’s anger among some about bear management, as bear break-ins and property damage have followed the recent mauling in town.
Around the Small Tracts Road and Fort Seward Area, residents this week described frequent sightings of bears roaming and feeding around the neighborhood. Fruit trees have been one target, with some frustrated over snapped limbs and proximity of the animals to homes as bears harvest cherries.
Small Tracts resident Don Turner Jr. said a bear…
10 Years Ago
The Haines Borough’s first avalanche-oriented weather station is a couple weeks from going online.
About 10 people climbed up Mount Ripinsky Saturday to assemble the solar-power station equipped with a rain gauge, anemometer and thermometer with an antenna setup to transmit information to the Haines Avalanche Information Center, where it is posted on the organization’s website.
At a later date, the center expects to install a sonic snow-depth sensor at the station,…
Monroe Hunsberger Jr.was born Oct. 2, 1937 and died Aug 24, 2026 in Sellersville, Penn. where he lived the last nine years. Prior to that, Hunsberger and his wife, Barbara, lived in Perkasia, Penn. for 57 years. Hunsberger’s funeral was held Sept. 3 at the Community at Rockhill, where he had been in nursing care since March. The Hunsbergers visited Haines many times, but it was when they both retired that they really settled…
Will Texas avenge last season’s loss to Ohio State? Can Michigan bounce back against Oklahoma after a shocking and controversial near-upset? Which teams will prove that their Week 1 performance wasn’t a fluke, but a trend to rely on? The college football season rolls on, and Week 2’s lineup is looking strong with some big cross-conference games, from Texas-Ohio State to Michigan-Oklahoma to Illinois-Duke and so many more. So before Week 2 kicks off, we’ve got some picks of the week, along with answers to those questions and more. We’re breaking down our straight-up picks for Week 2 and which matchups to keep a close eye on this weekend. Let’s get into it. When: Friday, 8 p.m. ET (FOX)Where: David Booth Kansas Memorial Stadium, Lawrence, KansasLine: Missouri -5.5 RJ Young: MissouriThe Tigers have the better quarterback, and their run game is still rather awesome even without Ahmad Hardy in the backfield. Laken Litman: MissouriMizzou takes down Kansas in an old rivalry game as former Ole Miss quarterback Austin Simmons lights up the Jayhawks with another multi-touchdown performance. Michael Cohen: MissouriAs a new face in a new place, Missouri quarterback Austin Simmons gave the Tigers plenty to be excited about in Week 1 with four touchdowns and only two incompletions. He keeps it rolling against the Jayhawks. Ben Portnoy: MissouriI’m in on Austin Simmons being a difference maker for the Tigers, even with a depleted run game. Head coach Eli Drinkwitz has largely handled business as a favorite during his tenure, and I think he does it again this week. When: Saturday, noon ET (FOX)Where: Michigan Stadium, Ann Arbor, MichiganLine: Oklahoma -5.5 Young: Oklahoma The Sooners have the edge at quarterback, wide receiver and defensive line. This could get ugly for Michigan if Bryce Underwood doesn’t show a tremendous leap in development. Litman: OklahomaThe biggest question for me is how Michigan quarterback Bryce Underwood will look after last week’s near disaster against Western Michigan. You know Oklahoma head coach Brent Venables will put together a defensive game plan that makes it as hard as possible for the young signal-caller to succeed. Cohen: OklahomaMaybe the Wolverines will bounce back a bit following last week’s controversial win over Western Michigan. But the safer bet is that Oklahoma’s terrific defense can cause even more problems for Bryce Underwood, whose time as the starter feels like it’s dwindling. Portnoy: OklahomaRecency bias has me incredibly down on the Wolverines, but there’s nothing I saw in Saturday’s win (?) over Western Michigan that makes me think they can beat a team of Oklahoma’s caliber. I think the Sooners are a legit dark horse to win the SEC this year, and I love what a healthy John Mateer brings. Give me the Sooners, big. When: Saturday, noon ET (ESPN)Where: Boone Pickens Stadium, Stillwater, OklahomaLine: Oregon -22.5 Young: OregonOregon is coming off of an embarrassing win, still has one of the best rosters in the sport and is about to play an Oklahoma State team that got beat by Tulsa, the smallest FBS school in the country. Name the number, Ducks. Litman: OregonThe Ducks had their “wake-up call” last week vs. Boise State, who could end up being the Group of Six College Football Playoff representative. While Stillwater is a tough place to play, Dan Lanning will have his team ready to go, while the Cowboys are in a transition year. Cohen: OregonThere will certainly be a response from Oregon’s defense after the highly-touted unit was gashed by Boise State in a surprisingly close opener. The Ducks should roll against an Oklahoma State team that looked quite rough in an upset loss to Tulsa. Portnoy: OregonOregon got a scare from Boise State last week, but there’s no way that’s happening two weeks in a row. Oklahoma State looked atrocious last week in Eric Morris’ debut at Tulsa. I’d be shocked if the Ducks don’t roll in this one. When: Saturday, 3:30 p.m. ET (FOX)Where: LaVell Edwards Stadium, Provo, UtahLine: BYU -7.5 Young: BYUI trust the BYU defense more than I trust quarterback Noah Fifita and the Arizona offense. Litman: BYUQuarterback Bear Bachmeier and the Cougars have to win their first Big 12 game to keep pace with the likes of Texas Tech and Houston, and will take care of business against Arizona. Cohen: BYUThis is an important early-season mile marker for BYU in its quest to supplant Texas Tech in the Big 12 hierarchy. A controlled win over Arizona should give the Cougars plenty of confidence at the start of conference play. Portnoy: BYUIf BYU is really going to challenge for the Big 12 title, this is the kind of game the Cougars need to win. Arizona was much improved last year and Noah Fifita is back, but I think BYU’s talent advantage outweighs that. When: Saturday, 3:30 p.m. ET (FS1)Where: Gies Memorial Stadium, Champaign, IllinoisLine: Illinois -5.5 Young: DukeThe defending ACC champs — Duke! — have a bona fide star at running back in Nate Sheppard and the Illinois defense gave up 24 first downs and 194 rushing yards to UAB in its opener. Litman: IllinoisQuarterback Katin Houser builds on his four-TD performance against UAB in Week 1 against the Darian Mensah-less Duke Blue Devils. Cohen: IllinoisHow popular is Illinois football right now? Illinois sold out Memorial Stadium for this week’s non-conference tilt against Duke. A crowd like that should push head coach Bret Bielema’s squad to a win. Portnoy: IllinoisKatin Houser put up huge numbers at East Carolina and his Big Ten return is off to a nice start. I like what Bret Bielema and this staff did with Luke Altmyer and Houser feels like a nice replacement. Duke has some talent, but Illinois is the better team here. When: Saturday, 3:30 p.m. ET (USA Net)Where: JMA Wireless Dome, Syracuse, New YorkLine: Syracuse -3.5 Young: SyracuseHead coach Fran Brown has his quarterback in Steve Angeli, and his quarterback is healthy. Angeli can be as good as Kyle McCord was at ‘Cuse if he stays healthy, and I like this matchup for a veteran head coach against a rookie one, in Cal’s Tosh Lupoi, coming off a loss and traveling across three time zones. Litman: SyracuseAn early season classic ACC matchup! Orange quarterback Steve Angeli keeps up momentum from a strong Week 1 performance as Cal falls to 0-2 in the Tosh Lupoi era. Cohen: CalFool me once (as the Bears did last week), shame on you. Fool me twice (as I back the Bears again this week), shame on me. They should bounce back with a win. Portnoy: CalTosh Lupoi’s team didn’t exactly help my case for the Golden Bears as potential ACC contenders with their loss to UCLA last week, but I’m riding with the “Calgorithm” again. Fran Brown’s team should be much improved with Steve Angeli, but I think Lupoi’s bunch bounce back after a tough opener. When: Saturday, 6 p.m. ET (USA Network)Where: Albertsons Stadium, Boise, IdahoLine: Boise State -8.5 Young: Boise StateI saw enough from the Broncos to believe they’re one of the two best teams in the Group of Six. Sadly, Memphis is not one of those two teams. Litman: Boise StateComing off an impressive performance from Week 1 where they almost knocked off then-No. 2 Oregon in Eugene, the Broncos get into the win column. Cohen: Boise StateThe Broncos played incredibly on the road at Oregon last week to establish themselves as legitimate CFP contenders from the Group of Six. Memphis wants to be viewed in that same category after knocking off UNLV in its season opener. Boise State is a cut above. Portnoy: Boise StateI’m rolling with the Broncos until proven otherwise. This team is as experienced as any in the Group of Six, and they looked the part last week at Oregon. Could there be a letdown? Sure, but I think Boise State will be able to run the ball more effectively against Memphis, and that gives the Broncos the edge. When: Saturday, 7:30 p.m. ET (FOX)Where: DKR-Texas Memorial Stadium, Austin, TexasLine: Texas -1.5 Young: Ohio StateThe Buckeyes’ weakness is on the offensive line. However, the cheat code exists. Quarterback Julian Sayin doesn’t have to punch up the “Konami code.” Just press four. Jeremiah Smith will beat the game. Litman: TexasArch Manning and the Texas defense aren’t about to let Ohio State beat them a third straight time in less than two years. Cohen: Ohio StateA year ago, new defensive coordinator Matt Patricia put the clamps on Texas’ offense. This time, new Ohio State offensive coordinator Arthur Smith will unleash a few wrinkles the Longhorns aren’t ready for. The Buckeyes get it done. Portnoy: TexasIf not now, when? That’s how I feel about Texas and its national title aspirations. Saturday’s game is a chance to cement the Longhorns as the top team in the country. I’m still skeptical of Arch Manning, but I think the talent drain on Ohio State’s defense shows up in Austin, and the home team gets a major résumé boost.Latest Sports News from FOX Sports
Drew Baldridge just got an exclusive peek at Luke Bryan’s world, and it went way beyond the concert stage. Continue reading…Country Music News – Taste of Country
Raising Cane’s is sweeping the nation with its chicken tenders, and if you’re itching to try it out, follow these rules to get the most out of your visit.
Food Republic – Restaurants, Reviews, Recipes, Cooking Tips
In August 2026, government investigators subjected roughly 50 military officers and civilian employees on the Joint Staff to polygraph tests as part of an inquiry into press leaks about the Iran war and depleted U.S. munitions, according to The New York Times. The newspaper described the scope of the investigation as unprecedented in the modern military.
This is not the first time the Trump administration has used polygraphs in this way; in 2025, it directed that a wave of tests be administered across the executive branch to expose minor leaks.
As someone who has taken roughly a dozen polygraphs during my 27-year career with the CIA, I am wary of how the process is understood – and of the certainty its use can appear to convey.
Polygraphs carry an ominous, almost mythological reputation among Americans. The more familiar and unofficial term – lie detector tests – likely fuels that perception. Television crime dramas have done their part, too, often portraying the device as an oracle for uncovering the truth when conventional methods fail.
In those portrayals, the polygraph is not merely a tool – it’s a window into the soul.
Among those entering government service, especially in national security, the greater anxiety is not the background check but passing the polygraph. My advice is always the same: Don’t lie. It’s the best – and perhaps only – guidance for a process that most assessments have concluded is a more subjective interpretation than empirical science.
Polygraphs are “pseudo-scientific” in that they measure physiological responses such as heart rate, blood pressure and perspiration. The assumption is that liars betray themselves through spikes in those signals. But this presumes a kind of psychological transparency that simply doesn’t hold up. A person might sweat and tremble simply from fear, anger or frustration – not deceit.
There also are no specific physiological reactions associated with lying. The National Academy of Sciences in 2003, and the American Psychological Association in a 2004 review, concluded that the polygraph rests more on theater than fact. A 2019 assessment reached the same conclusion.
Accordingly, polygraph results are not generally admissible in U.S. courts. Only a handful of states – such as Georgia, Arizona and California – permit their use even under limited conditions. And they typically require that both parties agree to admission and a judge to approve it. Unconditional admissibility remains the exception, not the rule.
And yet, inside many national security agencies, polygraphs remain central to the clearance process – a fact I observed firsthand during my time overseeing personnel vetting and analytic hiring within the intelligence community.
While not treated as conclusive, polygraph results often serve as a filter. A candidate’s visible discomfort – or the examiner’s subjective judgment that a response seems evasive – can stall or end the hiring process. For instance, I know that government agencies have halted clearances after an examiner flagged elevated reactions to questions about past drug use or foreign contacts, even when no disqualifying behavior was ultimately documented.
In some cases, an examiner’s suggestion that a chart shows an anomaly has led otherwise strong applicants to volunteer details they hadn’t planned to share – such as minor security infractions, undeclared relationships, or casual drug use from decades earlier – that, while not disqualifying on their own, reshape how their trustworthiness is perceived.
The polygraph’s power lies in creating the conditions under which deception is confessed.
No administration has been immune to the impulse to investigate leaks. The reflex is bipartisan and familiar: An embarrassing disclosure appears in the press – contradicting official statements or exposing internal dissent – and the White House vows to identify and punish the source. Polygraphs are often part of this ritual.
During his first term, Trump intensified efforts to expose internal dissent and media leaks. Department guidelines were revised to make it easier for agencies to obtain journalists’ phone and email records, and polygraphs were reportedly used to pressure officials suspected of talking to the press. That trend has continued – and, since 2025, escalated.
Policies at the Pentagon now restrict unescorted press access, revoke office space for major outlets and favor ideologically aligned networks. The line between legitimate leak prevention and the surveillance or sidelining of critical press coverage has grown increasingly blurred.
At agencies such as the Department of Homeland Security and the FBI, polygraphs reportedly have been used frequently – and more punitively – to identify internal dissenters. Even “cold cases,” such as the leak of the Supreme Court’s Dobbs opinion ahead of its overturning of Roe v. Wade, were reopened, despite prior investigations yielding no definitive source.
Not all leaks are treated the same. Disclosures that align with official narratives or offer strategic advantage may be quietly tolerated, even if unauthorized. Others, especially those that embarrass senior officials or reveal dysfunction, are more likely to prompt formal investigation.
In 2003, for example, the leak of CIA officer Valerie Plame’s identity – widely seen as retaliation for her husband’s criticism of the Iraq War – triggered a federal investigation. The disclosure embarrassed senior officials, led to White House aide Scooter Libby’s conviction for perjury, later commuted, and drew intense political scrutiny.
Leaks involving classified material draw the sharpest response when they challenge presidential authority or expose internal disputes. That was the case in 2010 with Chelsea Manning, whose disclosure of diplomatic cables and battlefield reports embarrassed senior officials and sparked global backlash. Government reaction often depends less on what was disclosed than on who disclosed it – and to what effect.
A narrow set of disclosures, such as those involving espionage or operational compromise, elicit broad consensus as grounds for prosecution. But most leaks fall outside that category. Most investigations fade quietly. The public rarely learns what became of them. Occasionally, there is a vague resignation, but direct accountability is rare.
The Pentagon polygraph campaign is not likely to eliminate leaks to the press. But it may have a chilling effect that discourages internal candor while diverting investigative energy away from core security priorities.
Even if such campaigns succeed in reducing unauthorized disclosures, they may come at the cost of institutional resilience. Historically, aggressive internal enforcement has been associated with declining morale and reduced information flow – factors that can hinder adaptation to complex threats.
Some researchers have suggested that artificial intelligence may eventually offer reliable tools for detecting deception but caution that the technology is nowhere near operational readiness.
For now, institutions will have to contend with the tools they have – imperfect, imprecise and more performative than predictive.
This is an updated version of a story that was first published on July 9, 2025.
Brian O’Neill does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Politics + Society – The Conversation
Reading Time: 2 minutes
The Lindsay Clancy murder trial may have ended in a mistrial, but the disturbing conspiracy theories surrounding the case haven’t gone away.
Now, one of the jurors who heard the evidence firsthand is pushing back against the people who continue to accuse Patrick Clancy of being responsible for the deaths of his three children.
Nick Dargie, a 25-year-old juror identified as Juror No. 10, spoke with Good Morning America about the case and said he has no doubt that Patrick was telling the truth when he called 911 after discovering what had happened inside the family’s Massachusetts home.
“I don’t believe in the conspiracy theory that [Patrick Clancy] was the one who did it,” Dargie said.
And he believes hearing that emergency call would change the minds of many people who have embraced the theory.
“I think if everyone heard that 911 call, they would change their mind,” Dargie added.
The call itself was not released outside of the courtroom. Judge William Sullivan reportedly determined that it was too disturbing to be made public.
But jurors heard it during the trial, and Dargie described the experience as something he will never forget.
“I’ll never forget [the 911 call.] That was frightening. I never heard something like that, a scream like that coming out of someone’s mouth; it’s horrifying,” he said.
Patrick discovered the bodies of his three children — Cora, 5, Dawson, 3, and Callan, 8 months — after returning home from an errand in January 2023.
Lindsay ultimately admitted to killing the children, but her defense argued that she was suffering from postpartum psychosis and was not criminally responsible for her actions. Prosecutors maintained that she understood what she was doing and should be held accountable.
After weeks of testimony, the jury deadlocked, resulting in a mistrial. Meanwhile, Patrick has faced an entirely different battle outside the courtroom.
Conspiracy theorists, including some public figures, have accused him of involvement in the children’s deaths despite the fact that he has never been charged in connection with the case.
Patrick, who has since remarried, has publicly forgiven Lindsay and spoken about the devastating impact of postpartum mental illness. But through his attorney, he has also made clear that he will not simply ignore the increasingly aggressive accusations against him.
His lawyer, Howard Cooper, said Patrick has faced a “relentless, escalating and destructive defamation campaign” that has put his “reputation, livelihood and life” at risk.
Even Lindsay’s own attorney, Kevin Reddington, has condemned the theories, saying Patrick’s life has been turned upside down by accusations he does not deserve.
“She knew that it was just terrible what he was going through,” Reddington told CBS this week
“She knows, and it’s readily apparent that Patrick has been set upon and his life has been turned upside down into a nightmare that he doesn’t deserve. Period. Full stop.”
After everything this family has endured, apparently, some people still haven’t gotten the message that Patrick Clancy is a victim, too.
Lindsay Clancy Juror and Lawyer Blast Patrick Clancy Conspiracy Theories: ‘He … was originally published on The Hollywood Gossip.
The Hollywood Gossip
Fans of traditional country don’t have much to be angry about in 2026. Continue reading…Country Music News – Taste of Country
Any fan of canned cocktails needs to try the brand Cutwater, which has a plethora of offerings and flavors. Even so, the best one outshines the others by miles.
Food Republic – Restaurants, Reviews, Recipes, Cooking Tips
